1st answer - "They then fastened his left foot on to his right foot, having first bored a hole through them with a species of piercer, because they could not be placed in such a position as to be nailed together at once. Next, they took a very long nail and drove it completely through both feet into the cross below, which operation was more than usually painful, on account of his body being so unnaturally stretched out."
2nd answer - Crucifiction was almost a sport for the Romans. Nailing Jesus's feet to the cross was just a traditional part of crucifying criminals. In doing this, it prolonged the criminal's suffering. It kept them alive a little longer. Cruel, I know.
3rd answer - They may not of been crossed at all. A heel bone was found in a Jewish tomb with a nail running sideways through the foot near the ankle. This suggests each foot may have been nailed to the sides of a stake instead of crossed in front. Probably more painful.
No. Tradition holds that none of Christ's bones were broken before or during or after crucifixion. See the Gospel of John 19:37-37.
At no time were any of his bones broken. He had to be a perfect sacrifice without defect.
yes i would of been pain full
Psalms 34:20 He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.
As Christ is a resurrected being, which means He has a body of flesh and bones, His bones are no longer upon the earth.
Jesus' legs were not broken during his crucifixion, as prophesied in the Old Testament (Psalm 34:20). This was seen as a fulfillment of scripture and a sign of his completeness as the perfect sacrificial lamb. Additionally, Jesus had already died before the soldiers came to break his legs, so there was no need for it.
AnswerIt was Roman practice to break the legs of those who had been crucified, if they wished to bring on an earlier death. Since the gospels say that the crucifixions took place just before the start of the Passover, the Jews would have wanted the bodies to be taken down before sunset. The Romans acquesced to this religious request, and broke the legs of the two men crucified with Jesus. However, John's Gospel treated the crucifixion of Jesus in some ways as an allegory for the Paschal lamb sacrificed by the Jews at Passover. The lamb had to be perfect, with no broken bones, so John says that the Romans, instead, speared Jesus in the side.
Find it's bones, cover it with salt then set the bones on fire. Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior....
The first connection is that the synoptic gospels tell us that the Last Supper of Jesus was the Passover feast, held at the start of the Passover holiday; Jesus was crucified the next day. John's Gospel alters this, to say that Jesus was crucified on the day of Preparation for the Passover feast. John therefore omits the description of the Last Supper, replacing it by Jesus washing the feet of the disciples.The synoptic gospels draw allusions to the lamb of the Passover, beginning with the story of Pontius Pilate releasing Barabbas instead of Jesus. By having Jesus sacrificed on the day of Preparation, John's Gospel can draw even closer parallels to the Jewish Passover, with Jesus as the sacrificial lamb, which must have no bones broken (John 19:33).
If it doesn't say so in the bible, then no one can possibly know.
AnswerUnder Jewish religious law, the sacrificial animal had to be perfect and without blemish, with no broken bones. The author of John's Gospel wanted to draw a parallel between Jesus and the paschal lamb for sacrifice, so he described in detail that the two others on the cross had their legs broken, while Jesus merely had a spear driven in his side.
The Broken Bones was created in 2000.
he has not broken any bones to this day .
No.He Did not have any broken bones.
No. You may not be aware of some broken bones